Letter: Andrew Brooks for Town Treasurer

More

There has been a boatload of misinformation propounded by the Democratic candidate for town treasurer and his supporters regarding the role of the town treasurer. This approach appears to be intended to mislead the voters about the integrity of Treasurer Andrew Brooks, who in my opinion has done a superlative job protecting New Canaan’s tax dollars.

As mandated by state statute, the treasurer has general oversight of town receipts and expenses, signs authorized checks, and approves bond issues. By contrast, the Finance Department is responsible for accounting, payroll and benefits, budget development, internal controls, financial reporting and debt management. In effect, the treasurer manages the town’s cash but is not responsible for nor manages the town’s accounting and financial reporting functions. The Board of Finance is responsible for annual budget reviews and approvals, setting the annual mill rate, approving special appropriations, and administering the pension fund.

Despite inferences of the Democratic candidate to the contrary, the Audit Committee reported that the Finance Department’s accounting, financial reporting and control responsibilities are not within the authority of the treasurer. It would be completely improper and possibly illegal for the treasurer to exercise authority that has not been granted by statute or Town Charter.

Treasurer Andrew Brooks has a strong record of protecting and managing the Town’s funds, reporting observed material weaknesses to the Audit Committee, requiring supporting documentation for expenses and ensuring compliance with negotiated agreements.

I urge you to vote for the re-election of Treasurer Andrew Brooks.

Evelyn Irene Barrack

One thought on “Letter: Andrew Brooks for Town Treasurer

  1. Vote for Andrew — I will — I can not vote for Kit –reason
    an unremarkable time on the TC and BOF — Andrew rocked the boat
    I like people like that — Kit (very nice person) never did
    went along with the the tax and spenders — is why property taxes were 95 million in 2007 and now 136 million

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *